Home About Archives RSS Feed

The Independent Investor: Should You Rollover That Retirement Plan?

By Bill SchmickiBerkshires Columnist

If you still have your money invested in your former employer's retirement plan, you may want to rethink the wisdom of that decision. Time and again, retirees, or those saving toward retirement, take the easy way out and do nothing. That could be a big mistake.

Invariably I meet prospective clients who have one, two and even three 401(k) or 403(b) retirement plans from former employers that just sit at the old companies, untouched and ignored. In the vast majority of cases, these plans should be rolled over into a tax-deferred Individual Retirement Account (IRA).

"I left it at my old company because it's free and I don't have to manage it," explained one recent prospective client, who now works at a consumer magazine. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Company retirement plans charge you anywhere from 1.5-2.5 percent annually for the privilege of investing and tax-deferred saving. It is their dirty little secret. The Department of Labor now requires companies to be upfront with the fees they are charging employees. Some studies estimate that employees pay 33 percent or more of their entire retirement savings in fees over the average life of their employer plan. Those fees continue if you leave and your plan stays and may actually go higher if the ex-employee is no longer contributing to the plan.

Many investors mistakenly believe that their company actively manages their portfolio as if it were a pension plan. Not true. The responsibility for managing that money is in your hands. You may not know what to do with it, but by abdicating your responsibility, you open yourself up to potential losses or missed opportunities while continuing to pay a stiff fee.

Most employer-sponsored plans offer a limited number of investment choices. I have seen plans that have ten or twenty fund choices while others have no more than four or five. Many times the performance of these offered funds are mediocre at best.

At the very least, having retirement savings in several locations adds confusion and makes tracking your investments and returns far more complicated. The older or busier one becomes, the less complexity one needs in life — especially when it comes to your money. Trust me; it is much easier to monitor your investments in one IRA rather than in several 401(k) s.

The same advice applies to rolling over you old 401(k) or 403(b) into a new one at your present company. Do not do it. The same set of conditions exists within your existing company’s plan.  Better to roll over those funds into a lower-cost IRA.

So how hard is it to rollover your retirement savings? All you need do is open an IRA at any broker, bank or money management firm. It costs nothing and they do the paperwork. Once you have your new account number, you simply call your old plan sponsor (the number is on the statement) and inform them that you want to rollover your dormant employer-sponsored plan to your new IRA and give them the account number.

Depending on the company, they can either send you an application to facilitate your request or simply transfer the funds based on your phone call. Some companies insist on sending you the check. If so, you have sixty days to deposit it into your rollover IRA or you will pay a tax penalty. Most companies simply transfer your money directly into your new IRA. The entire process can take a few weeks to a month or so. It costs you nothing to do it.

You will immediately enjoy a cost savings, since you are no longer paying those high plan fees each year. Your menu of investment choices will be vastly larger offering you the very best funds at the lowest costs available. If you have little or no knowledge of investments, you can hire an investment adviser. The fees will most likely be lower than the fees you are paying now. If money managers are not your thing, hire a broker to do the job. Just make sure you find a good one who is willing to listen, to charge you a reasonable commission and keep your investment choices to the lowest cost funds with the smallest sales charges.

Bill Schmick is registered as an investment adviser representative with Berkshire Money Management. Bill’s forecasts and opinions are purely his own. None of the information presented here should be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. Direct inquires to Bill at 1-888-232-6072 (toll free) or email him at Bill@afewdollarsmore.com.

     

The Independent Investor: Income Inequality on a Global Scale

By Bill SchmickiBerkshires Columnist

Income inequality has suddenly become a hot topic. Think tanks worldwide are releasing studies on the issue. In this country, the president has made it a political issue in the mid-term elections. This week in Davos, the World Economic Forum will take up the gauntlet as well. It's about time.

Two years ago, readers may recall my four-part series on the growing inequality here at home and throughout the world. You were shocked to learn that America ranks last among all developed countries in income equality. As a nation, our income inequality is about equal to that of the Third World sandwiched between Uruguay and Cote d'Ivoire. States such as Massachusetts ranks about equal with Mexico, Connecticut with Venezuela, New York with Costa Rico and New Hampshire with Cambodia.

This week Oxfam, a non-profit confederation of 17 organizations in 90 countries, released a study that indicates that 85 of the richest people in the world own as much as the poorest 50 percent of humanity. Think of it, a double-decker busload of one percenters control $1.7 trillion, equivalent to the combined wealth of 3.5 billion people. Seventy percent of the world's population lives in a country where inequality has increased over the past 30 years.

In the United States, the gap between the have and have not's has grown at a faster pace than in any other developed country. The top 1 percent captured 95 percent of all the post-recession growth since 2009, while 90 percent of us became poorer, Oxfam's report mirrors several other studies including a University of California, Berkeley study, the Pew Research Center's findings and the IMF. The results are essentially the same.

At the tiny Swiss town of Davos, 2,500 participants from almost 100 countries will be flying in on their private jets and limousines. In years past, attendees were largely billionaire tycoons, business executives, the rich and famous, in essence a genteel gathering of the world's one percent. Supposedly, this year, they will be joined by some of the rabble. Representatives from international non-profit organizations, members of civil society and spiritual leaders, academia and the media have been invited.

This will allow for a larger cross-section of political, cultural and societal views but, excuse my cynicism; it is still essentially a rich man's club. As such, how serious will its members address income inequality when it is they who have profited the most from the trend? Granted, the fox may express its concern and sympathy over events in the hen house, but do we really think he will stop eating the hens?

In our own country, politicians on both sides of the aisle are honing their stump speeches. The Republicans will be preaching how free markets are the answer to income inequality while conveniently ignoring the failure of 30 years of "trickle down" economics. The Democrats will argue that the nation needs more social programs and even greater redistribution of income in order to level the playing field. Of course, they will dodge the fact that three decades of government-sponsored social initiatives have failed to even slow the growth rate of inequality in this nation. Could it have something to do with the fact that the average elected official in this country is a millionaire and thus part of the 1 percent?

Riddle me this reader, what happens to societies when inequality reaches a critical mass? The think tanks use words like "explosive," "serious damage" and "instability" in explaining the outcome. They are all code words for revolution, armed conflict and massive upheaval. Usually, a leader appears to lead the revolt, maybe a Robespierre or a Hitler or someone worse.

It surprises me why more people fail to see the connection between the growing income inequality and recent global uprisings in the Middle East, Asia and other places. I'm hoping this recent concern is more than a passing fad or a sop for the masses because the stakes are high, ladies and gentleman, and getting higher every day.

Bill Schmick is registered as an investment adviser representative with Berkshire Money Management. Bill’s forecasts and opinions are purely his own. None of the information presented here should be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. Direct inquires to Bill at 1-888-232-6072 (toll free) or email him at Bill@afewdollarsmore.com.

     

Independent Investor: The Internet Will Change

By Bill SchmickiBerkshires Columnist

"Net Neutrality" is the official name for an open Internet. It means that all Internet providers are to be treated the same regardless of whether you are a mom and pop company or a global behemoth. This week's federal appeals court ruling pulled the plug on that concept.

The judges ruled that the Federal Communication Commission's anti-discrimination rules were beyond the scope of its authority when it came to the Internet. Congress gave the FCC authority to regulate common carriers, such as telecommunication companies, years ago. The FCC has always ruled that telephone networks cannot discriminate against consumers.

However, back in the Bush administration, the FCC was pressured by phone and cable lobbyists to categorize Internet service providers differently. They are considered information services, which we now discover exempts them from common carrier rules. In hindsight, that was a big mistake.

For consumers the fallout could be huge. Fee-free services that we now take for granted may not work as well as before. Internet service providers could now charge fees for the privilege of "service in the fast lane" while the rest of us find we have been consigned to the tortoise lane.

If you're a company that really needs a large amount of bandwidth to provide your services to the consumer in a timely fashion, fees will be going up. Think of companies such as Netflix, Amazon Prime, YouTube, Facebook and others that may have to pay more to ISPs in order to ensure that their content remains accessible to their customers. We all know what that means — higher costs will be passed on to us in the form of higher charges for the same service.

Higher fees could also mean less innovation. Much of today's new ideas are Internet-related, simply because anyone with a good idea can try it out with little to no cost on the Internet. There will be fewer garage startups by Internet and Web-enabled entrepreneurs. Small companies will find it harder to launch new services or compete with existing players that have the resources to pay and keep new players out.

But this is not only about the cost of your next viewing of "House of Cards" or "Orange is the New Black." The Internet has become society's great equalizer. Anyone, regardless of background, income, or race can access the Web for any number of reasons from education to entertainment. As ISPs begin to resemble cable companies, those who can pay will receive a far different level of service from those that can’t.

Society in general will suffer as yet another great divide will be created. Those who can pay will have access and those who don't will see further stratification of society based on incomes and demographics. From the great equalizer, the Internet could become the great divider over time.

There is still hope, however. Net neutrality could still survive. There is nothing in the court's ruling that prevents the FCC from reversing their Bush-era decision. They could simply change the definition and treat the Internet providers as part of the telecommunications industry. Of course, that would put them at logger heads with a very powerful lobbying army and a number of politicians who are being paid to represent the interest of the ISPs.

That's where you come in. You could always call your elected official and express your opinion.

Bill Schmick is registered as an investment adviser representative with Berkshire Money Management. Bill’s forecasts and opinions are purely his own. None of the information presented here should be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. Direct inquires to Bill at 1-888-232-6072 (toll free) or email him at Bill@afewdollarsmore.com.

     

The Independent Investor: Make a Financial Resolution This Year

By Bill SchmickiBerkshires Columnist

As most of us resolve to lose weight, quit smoking or in some other way change our lives this year, don't forget to re-evaluate where you stand financially. There are some simple steps you can take that will reshape your fortunes for years to come.

Most people don't know where they stand financially. Many can't tell you how much they spend or make, what their tax bracket is or how much they have saved. My advice is to create a budget as well as a statement of net worth.

It is not that complicated. Just track your spending for a month, separating essential from non-essential expenses. Next keep track of whatever income comes in. Subtract one from the other and you now have a cash flow. Now you can figure out what you spend and what you make a year simply by multiplying by 12 months.

Now comes the important part. If you spend more than you earn, as most of us do, you will at least know how much debt you are accumulating each year. There is no way anyone can get out from under a heavy debt burden unless they know how much debt they have in the first place. A first step in reducing that debt would be to cut back on those non-essential spending items.

On the other hand, some of us may find that we earn more than we spend each month but somehow the money just disappears. Usually, it is found among those same non-essential items that you don’t need but buy anyway. This is money that you should be saving toward retirement. You should be saving 10-15 percent of your pre-tax income each year, starting in your 20s, and add 10 percent more for every decade you don't.

Personal net worth is also a good thing to know. Once again, sit down and add up everything you own and how much it is worth. Next, figure out what you owe: mortgages, car payments, medical bills, school loans, etc. Subtract one from the other and you now have your net worth.

Armed with this new budget and net worth information, you can now create some goals and objectives. Are you spending too much? If so, create a spending reduction goal each month through the end of the year. Establish a debt-reduction goal for the year and make sure you are on track each month to achieve it.

If you can save, establish a goal for how much you will put away this year, and keep to it. At first it may only be an emergency fund, which in a pinch; would cover 3-6 months of expenses. After that, you might want to think about saving toward retirement through one of the many tax-deferred savings plans available.

These are simple steps that cost nothing but time and effort. The trick is to stick with the process. So often, New Year's resolutions last about as long as it takes to write them down. This year don't let that happen to you.

Bill Schmick is registered as an investment adviser representative with Berkshire Money Management. Bill’s forecasts and opinions are purely his own. None of the information presented here should be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. Direct inquires to Bill at 1-888-232-6072 (toll free) or email him at Bill@afewdollarsmore.com.

     

The Independent Investor: Japan Embraces Bushido

By Bill SchmickiBerkshires Columnist

It was a word rarely spoken in postwar Japan. Bushido, or the "Way of the Warrior," evoked too many embarrassing and shameful memories culminating in the horror of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But times have changed.

On Dec. 26, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe did the unthinkable. Defying the Koreas, China and the U.S., he visited the Yasukuni war shrine. It is where the memories of 2.4 million Japanese dead from three wars are remembered. His 30-minute visit sparked outrage from Japan's neighbors who view the shrine as a symbol of Japan's imperial military past.

Last Tuesday, the Japanese government confirmed my thesis presented to readers six months ago. On Tuesday, it announced a significant increase in its defense spending over the next five years amounting to 24.6 trillion yen ($237 billion). That's an increase over the current plan and, in my opinion, the defense budget will be increased again and again as time goes by.

They will use the money to acquire surveillance drones, 28 American F-35A fighter jets, 17 Osprey aircraft, five naval destroyers, six submarines plus amphibious vehicles. That's not all. Japan's existing Self-Defense Forces will be beefed up with a new amphibious unit (similar to the U.S. Marine Corp) whose job would be to re-take islands captured by the enemy.

Abe also announced the establishment of a U.S.-style National Security Council and gained support for changing the country's constitution, specifically Article 9, which prevents Japan from "collective self-defense" (coming to the aid of its allies).

Clearly, Japan is rebuilding its defense capability. This sea change will have long-term repercussions for the Japanese economy and the balance of geopolitical power in Southeast Asia. It also adds to U.S. security while reducing our costs as we begin to share the role of the world's policeman.

In my last column back in August, "Japan's New Frontier," I argued that this island nation was on the eve of re-inventing itself. I predicted that as part of an economic renaissance, Prime Minster Abe and his cabinet was preparing to expand its defense capabilities. Re-armament, in my opinion, would address several issues simultaneously.

An expanding defense industry would provide a large number of highly skilled, highly paid jobs for the country's workforce. It would also be an easy avenue for the government to provide spending and additional stimulus to the economy. It would answer the U.S. government's on-going request that Japan shoulder more responsibility in policing their side of the globe, specifically Southeast Asia. And finally, the return of the samurai in the form of a stronger army, navy and air force would provide a strong detriment against encroachment from China, North Korea and, someday, possibly a more aggressive Russia under Putin.

Recent events have played into the hands of Abe in martialing support in his quest toward bushido. China's arbitrary declaration of an exclusive "air-defense identification zone," covering the disputed Senkaku Islands recently lent credence to Abe's argument that Japan must be willing and able to protect its own territory or else others would take it from them.

This argument reverberates in other parts of Asia. Vietnam and the Philippines have their own disputes with China over territory. It is no accident that Japan, using last month's typhoon damage in the Philippines, dispatched troops, ships and generous amounts of aid while China did next to nothing. It was the largest deployment of Japanese forces since 1945.

Most readers are aware that I have been bullish on Japan, its economy and stock market for the last two years. Everything I see convinces me that my investment stance is correct.

Bill Schmick is registered as an investment adviser representative with Berkshire Money Management. Bill’s forecasts and opinions are purely his own. None of the information presented here should be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. Direct inquires to Bill at 1-888-232-6072 (toll free) or email him at Bill@afewdollarsmore.com.

     
Page 57 of 90... 52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62 ... 90  

Support Local News

We show up at hurricanes, budget meetings, high school games, accidents, fires and community events. We show up at celebrations and tragedies and everything in between. We show up so our readers can learn about pivotal events that affect their communities and their lives.

How important is local news to you? You can support independent, unbiased journalism and help iBerkshires grow for as a little as the cost of a cup of coffee a week.

News Headlines
Crosby/Conte Statement of Interest Gets OK From Council
WCMA: 'Cracking the Code on Numerology'
BCC Wins Grant for New Automatic External Defibrillator
Clark Art Screens 'Adaptation'
Drury High School to Host End-of-Year Showcase
Clarksburg Gets 3 Years of Free Cash Certified
Pittsfield CPA Committee Funds Half of FY24 Requests
MCLA Men's Lacrosse Falls in League Opener
Letter: Vote for Someone Other Than Trump
Berkshire Art Center's Dance Party Returns
 
 


Categories:
@theMarket (480)
Independent Investor (451)
Retired Investor (183)
Archives:
March 2024 (5)
March 2023 (2)
February 2024 (8)
January 2024 (8)
December 2023 (9)
November 2023 (5)
October 2023 (7)
September 2023 (8)
August 2023 (7)
July 2023 (7)
June 2023 (8)
May 2023 (8)
April 2023 (8)
Tags:
Recession Oil Markets Japan Election Jobs Europe Stocks Europe Banking Currency Banks Federal Reserve Metals Selloff Pullback Debt Ceiling Retirement Stimulus Deficit Congress Stock Market Interest Rates Economy Taxes Bailout Energy Employment Commodities Euro Debt Rally Fiscal Cliff Crisis Greece
Popular Entries:
The Independent Investor: Don't Fight the Fed
Independent Investor: Europe's Banking Crisis
@theMarket: Let the Good Times Roll
The Independent Investor: Japan — The Sun Is Beginning to Rise
Independent Investor: Enough Already!
@theMarket: Let Silver Be A Lesson
Independent Investor: What To Expect After a Waterfall Decline
@theMarket: One Down, One to Go
@theMarket: 707 Days
The Independent Investor: And Now For That Deficit
Recent Entries:
@theMarket: Sticky Inflation Slows Market Advance
The Retired Investor: Eating Out Not What It Used to Be
@theMarket: Markets March to New Highs (Again)
The Retired Investor: Companies Dropping Degree Requirements
@theMarket: Tech Takes Break as Other Sectors Play Catch-up
The Retired Investor: The Economics of Taylor Swift
@theMarket: Nvidia Leads Markets to Record Highs
The Retired Investor: The Chocolate Crisis, or Where Is Willie Wonka When You Need Him
The Retired Investor: Auto Insurance Premiums Keep Rising
@theMarket: Melt-up in Markets Fueled by Momentum